Amanda Knox's conviction reinstated by appeals court in Italy

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by Vash01, Jan 30, 2014.

  1. michiruwater

    michiruwater Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Messages:
    9,238
    I think Amanda has already served her time for the slander charges against Lumumba, so I am not concerned with those charges. I do not believe she murdered Meredith Kercher. No, I do not know all the facts that the Italian courts know. Of course I do not. No one in this thread does, as none of us are part of that court as far as I know. If anyone is, I would love to hear that person present the facts, though I doubt they would be allowed to disclose everything, in which case it is a moot point anyway.

    Based on the evidence I have been able to collect and read, which is probably more than some and less than others in this thread, I do not believe she killed Meredith, and I believe the court is wrong. Yes, I am biased by my own justice system - anyone would be, and I won't apologize for that. Every single person in this thread is making a judgment based on the facts they have been able - or willing - to collect and read. That is the way human beings operate, and that is what we do in every single thread on this website and in others. We give, argue, and discuss our opinions based on the facts we believe, in whatever way we came across them.

    I take exception to the people who have decided to accuse every single one of us who believe she is innocent of, essentially, being idiot, ignorant, egoistic Americans who don't know their assholes from their heads. I do not see a difference between our opinions, formed by the facts that we have read, and yours, except that we happen to have come to different conclusions. I do not have cable, I haven't been following this on the news, I sought out the information on my own, from both sides of the case. And I do believe that the evidence is inconclusive, to say the least. I believe she has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I do not know if reasonable doubt exists in Italian courts, but if it does not then I will say - and perhaps this does make me an egotistical American - that I think a person absolutely should always be innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I believe in that right. And I do not believe they have proven it beyond a reasonable doubt.

    And now I think I should stay away from this thread.
     
    OliviaPug, UMBS Go Blue, Coco and 3 others like this.
  2. loulou

    loulou Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,783
    It means that everything we mention hides procedures, laws, labs, most of which differ from county to country, most of which would take long days to be reported in full complexity. A fingerprint, for example, isn't just universally such, even though we tend to treat it as such.

    Zippy wrote: "Some of us have plenty of science background to be able to understand the forensic details", and proceded to sum up the whole forensics of the case in a few lines. He/she should have been consulting the experts that struggled and fought on this case, filling up half a room with reports.



    I have no idea.
    I can however tell you that, because of Berlusconi, a good part of Italians despises judges, and a good part of italian media is just waiting for an opportunity to bash them.
    The town where Kercher was killed is strongly against this trial, and a conviction in particular: they couldn't care less about justice, but they do care about the business that students - foreign and american students in particular - bring there. Or used to bring there.
    Based on that, my guess would be no.


    And again, I'm sure she's having every opportunity to point that out in court.


    Yes, you do have to know how a proper triple axel should be performed if you're going to critique one. Otherwise, on what basis would you critique?


    I was actually surprised no one was picking up on that line, but here you are.

    Italy is heavily corrupted, but.

    As far as I'm aware of, not much has ever emerged on italian judges, and never to have a conviction, expecially when the other part is the State.
    The profession doesn't seem to be affected the same degree the country as a whole is.

    But let's say this might be a scenario that contemplates corruption.

    Who would be corrupting the judges to convict Sollecito and Knox? And where is the money coming from? This kind of corruption, with all the media attention and the US alert, must be expensive.

    Since you're not buying it, please answer my two questions.

    If I had to assume corruption was involved in this, and I'm not saying I think it is, I would guess it would be coming from the defendants.

    I already noted how Sollecito's lawyer, when he was sentenced not guilty, was sitting in the parlament, associated with Berlusconi, and head of the justice commettee.
    She could have impacted the professional lives of the judges, which I believe is a huge conflict, and stinks.
    Also, being associated with Berlusconi does not present someone as astranged to corruption or other filthy methods, quite the opposite.

    And finally, the defendants have strong motives that could push some people in their position to turn to corruption. But I don't see motives for corruption elsewhere.


    Let me see if I get this straight: you're assuming the judges are convicting Sollecito and Knox without solid evidence, they are putting their career at risk, they are exposing themselves (!) to the US media and US diplomacy, they are causing a riff that could endanger the relatioship amongst countries like Italy, the UK and the US, to cover up a possible mess made by some small town, low ranked police?


    You are a wonder.
    Me, I was wondering; if you could sum up, effectively and efficiently as you're capable of, the 14 flags the Supreme Court raised, regarding the first appeal.
    I tried to look at pieces of the originals, had to read them twice, and still had trouble fully understanding them.
    Can you help?
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2014
  3. Vagabond

    Vagabond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3,754
    Surely there is a difference between voluntarily filing a false police report and making false statements after undergoing custodial interrogation for several days without an attorney and your instinct for self-preservation kicks in, no? Otherwise, you might as well prosecute people who made stuff up when they were subjected to waterboarding by the U.S. and its minions.

    ETA: FWIW, filing a false police report is normally a misdemeanor in the United States and does not necessarily involve defamation.
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2014
  4. duane

    duane New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,173
    From what I've read, you're totally correct that public opinion in Italy is strongly against Knox.
     
  5. Prancer

    Prancer Dysteleological Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    38,863
    And again, what is your point? :confused: If there were no Knox or Sollecito fingerprints found at the murder scene by Italian legal standards, then there were no fingerprints to consider as evidence in the court case.

    I think it would be bizarre in the extreme to look at evidence that wasn't part of the actual case. The issue is not whether or not there was evidence other than what was used in court, but whether the evidence that was used in court was sufficient.
     
  6. MacMadame

    MacMadame Cat Lady-in-Training

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,808
    Then why has it been widely reported that there were demonstrations in the street and outrage by a large portion of the populace when the guilty verdict was overturned?

    What I said was that it is possible to have that knowledge -- of how a triple axel is properly performed -- without being able to perform a triple axel oneself. Therefore, your question makes no sense.

    It's about saving face. Upholding the conviction saves face for the country.
     
  7. loulou

    loulou Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,783
    No, it doesn't.
    It's not pointless at all to discuss how opinions are formed.


    I'm hoping this has nothing to do with me, though my english is never conveing my points sharply enough.

    Everyone is entitled to believe Knox is innocent.
    You migth feel like convicting her is a tragic mistake.
    But, by your own admission, your judgement and everyone else's in here, isn't an educated one. It couldn't possibly be. People who do that for a living spent months on the case.

    My point (on this thread, not directed to you) is you can have a feeling, and call it an opinion, but you can't claim unjust, not by the law, which societies chose over anarchy.

    Because I wouldn't see anything in the past or in the present that could bias this against Knox, or that could lead to think judges are uncapable, or that Knox isn't well represented and heard.
     
  8. loulou

    loulou Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,783
    As you point out, you have to have the knowledge.
    To say that the rules are unjust or that they are broken, you should know the procedures, the laws, the science, what laws work better when in place, and where.


    You have a weird sense of what saves a face.
    If you make a huge and tragic mistake as unjustly convicting two young people, you can only save your face by correcting it.
    You certainly do not save your face, infact you make matters worse, if you hold to your mistakes, once you're aware and convinced of them.


    Also, I made you two questions you hadn't answered.
     
  9. MacMadame

    MacMadame Cat Lady-in-Training

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,808
    By that logic, I can't fight against female circumcision in other countries.
     
    OliviaPug and (deleted member) like this.
  10. agalisgv

    agalisgv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    24,018
    I'm struck by the claim that Amanda made incriminating statement when she was secretly recorded speaking to her mother. How would that be connected to at all to false confessions under custodial investigation? I would think if Amanda did indeed just make it up, she would have said something to that effect when she spoke with her mom privately. But apparently that's not what happened.
     
  11. loulou

    loulou Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,783
    My understanding is that the forensics science has been the key point for the convinction overturn in the first appeal, the science was the main controversy.
    How can we sum up in a few lines a controvery that lies in the science, in its possible interpretations and its possible manifestations, without mentioning those? without owning the science nor all the files of the trial?
     
  12. loulou

    loulou Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,783
    No, unless you're saying in this case were applied barbarian laws.

    Why did the US sign an extradition treaty with Italy if Italy had such brutal laws?
    Why didn't the US government warn citizens Italy was dangerous in that way?
     
  13. loulou

    loulou Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,783
    It is my understanding that this was one of the reasons that made the Supreme Court raise a flag over Knox initial statements.
    From what I was able to get, they said that while her statements couldn't be considered as the plot of the story, they couldn't have been disregarded entirely either, unless further justification to this choice was provided - hence, ordered the new appeal, which led to this last conviction.
     
  14. heckles

    heckles Banned Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,120
    If the US could ignore Mussolini for a butt-long time, it can ignore a lot.
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2014
  15. Sk8ngCat

    Sk8ngCat Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    110
  16. agalisgv

    agalisgv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    24,018
    According to the link above, and in a translation of the Italian court findings, Amanda's DNA is indeed found at the crime scene (as is her boyfriend's), in multiple places.

    Not sure where the story arose that no DNA evidence from Knox was present :confused:
     
  17. missing

    missing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,630
    I know so little about the case that I truly have no opinion about guilt or innocence. But I do wonder if she'll "escape." Is it easier now or harder to vanish from sight? Can she settle into a reasonably comfortable life somewhere or is she too well known internationally to become a new persona in a different world?
     
  18. Prancer

    Prancer Dysteleological Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    38,863
    Because the DNA was found in the apartment but not in Meredith's room. The mixed DNA was found in the bathroom. The other DNA was on a knife and the bra clasp; see zippy's posts for why those findings were disputed.
     
  19. Vagabond

    Vagabond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3,754
    Signing an extradition treaty does not mean forfeiting constitutional protections of basic rights. Thus, Italy, for example, which has no death penalty, will not extradite a criminal defendant to a jurisdiction in which he might face the death penalty. Instead, Italy would require the prosecution to waive the death penalty.

    If you don't like this, and think Italy should be extraditing people to face the death penalty, go tell your own government, not ours. :)
     
  20. MacMadame

    MacMadame Cat Lady-in-Training

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,808
    The statements she made to her mother were very confused and vague. And mostly about Lumumba. She certainly didn't tell her mother that she killed Knox or any incriminating details.
     
  21. reckless

    reckless Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,384
    I practice appellate law and just to clarify something in Prancer's post. She said you can appeal if there is judicial error. That suggests that appeals only lie if the judge erred. However, there are a lot of different grounds for appealing from a ruling in a trial court and different types of alleged errors are evaluated using different standards. It is possible to appeal just arguing that the evidence does not support the conviction. That is usually a difficult standard to meet in the US because even a little evidence is often enough; the reviewing court will generally assume the jury or judge (if there was no jury) was in the best position to weigh the evidence and assess credibility.

    Because that is such a difficult threshold, most appeals assert legal errors. That might be that the judge gave the jury wrong instructions on what the legal standards are, that it misintrpreted the law in rendering a decision on some point in the case, or that erred in admitting evidence. Evidentiary decisions are usually considered discretionary so unless the defendant can show that the trial court got the law wrong when it admitted or excluded the evidence, the reviewing court will again usually defer to the trial court's decision.

    There also are other grounds for appeal like prosecutorial misconduct (e.g., withholding evidence, making improper argument to the jury), juror misconduct (jurors are only supposed to decide the case after all the evidence is heard and based only on what is introduced at trial, but sometimes violate those standards), newly discovered evidence (this usually has to be brought to the trial court first), and ineffective assistance of counsel.

    Also, Prancer used the phrase "prejudicial error." That means that it is not enough to just identify some error that was made in the trial court. The error has to be shown to be "prejudicial," i.e., the defendant has to show that if the decision had gone the other way, the outcome of the case would likely have been different. Appellate courts often will acknowledge that a trial court made a mistake, but will deem it "harmless error."
     
    AxelAnnie and (deleted member) like this.
  22. kosjenka

    kosjenka Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,724
    I have no idea if Knox and Sollecito are guilty or not. I was reading several sites about the evidence and specifics of the trial and I fail to see the motive for Knoxs and especially Sollecito. If all 3 of them are guilty (that Rudy's DNA was inside Meredith and all over her room so he is locked with that) - but how is Rudy connected with Knox and Sollecito? For the two of them to be apart of the way Kertcher was killed - there had to be motive which goes beyond the girls not liking each other and not being friendly and I am sure there would have been more physical evidence.

    I know from personal experience how you can be lead to give statement with the police guiding you there and having you imagine things that later show up in the written statements. I dont claim Knox was confused or was covering her tracks or somebody else, I just know this happened more often than it is known and more people implicate innocent people in the story in situations where there is no brutal murder.

    The way this was covered in Italy in the media was disgusting. The story about satanic sex ritual under the drugs is the one that was sold to the media. I dont remember any evidence of Knox & Sollecito being druggies. I know they admitted smoking joint in his apartment but no tests were done for alcohol or drugs on them because they were being questioned but were not suspects(?).
     
  23. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,561
    Here's something I'd like to know: How were they able to secretly record Knox's conversations with her mother, yet unable to record a word of her interrogations?

    I mentioned this up thread. But, I seem to remember that the prosecutor, in this case, had prior misconduct issues. Am I remembering this right?
     
  24. Sk8ngCat

    Sk8ngCat Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    110
     
  25. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,561
     
  26. MacMadame

    MacMadame Cat Lady-in-Training

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,808
    It makes no sense and there was no physical evidence really.

    To believe they did it means you believe they had some sort of psychic break, committed a terribly violent crime while doped up on pot (which tends to make you sleepy and/or passive), and yet were savvy enough to clean up all traces of their involvement. While leaving all traces of Guede's involvement. Even though they were high. Which does not tend to make one savvy. If even a savvy person could have done such a thing.

    It just defies common sense to me.

    I can buy one or both of them walking in on the murder and freaking out and lying about it later leading to strange behavior which was misunderstood by the cops. (The evidence supports this.)

    I can buy them being friends with someone who lead them into a murder that they were reluctant participants in and then all 3 cleaning up so there was no evidence of any of them or some evidence of some of them. (The evidence does not support this as there is no evidence they knew Guede and there is no evidence they cleaned up and there is evidence only of Guede's presence, not none of them or all 3 of them except for the bra strap which is tainted evidence and not evidence of Knox's involvement.)

    I can't buy the whole satanic ritual story (no evidence of satanic rituals at all).

    I don't buy the whole sex game gone wrong (again no evidence of this).

    I can sort of see that the two roommates didn't get along and had tension over different standards of cleanliness as that is very common in roommate relationships. It doesn't often lead to murder though. Especially after 5-6 weeks of rooming together. Generally one or the other moves out. Amanda had a boyfriend and was spending all her time with him. That's a perfect solution to living with a slob so no murder was necessary. It does somewhat explain some of her reactions afterwards though. If she seemed cold afterwards maybe it's because she barely knew her roommate and didn't like her much. On top of being in shock.
     
  27. agalisgv

    agalisgv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    24,018
    If you read the evidence linked to earlier, you'd see they did leave physical evidence including DNA. It wasn't just traces of Guede's present--Amanda's DNA and physical evidence was there too.

    I did read the transcript of Amanda's phone call to her mom, and the court transcript too. The issue with the phone call to her mom was that she called her frantically before Meredith's body was found. And her mother acknowledged she was in a state when they talked. Even the mom questioned Amanda why she was so worked up when the body hadn't officially been discovered yet. Amanda couldn't give a response to that, and only said she didn't remember calling and talking to her mom.

    That I believe is the incriminating evidence with the taped phone call.
     
  28. zippy

    zippy Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    573
    It's important to keep in mind that particular site is one of the most prominent sites trying to show Knox and Sollecito's guilt - honestly it's just about impossible to find a summary of the evidence online that isn't biased one way or the other. The list of evidence linked to did hit the prosecution's main points but also includes things that had been abandoned by the prosecution even before the first trial for being too problematic/unreliable as well as bits that were incorrectly reported in the media and not included in court documents, and it omits points that would be favorable to Knox/Sollecito. But when people say there's no physical evidence, I think they're generally referring to the room where the murder took place, since that room had a large amount of physical evidence from Guede and nothing but the bra clasp from anyone else. That physical evidence from Knox could be found in other areas of the apartment isn't really in dispute, but the interpretation of it gets messy since she lived there.
     
  29. kosjenka

    kosjenka Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,724
    I guess it is a need to understand. I remember way too many times when the behavior of the accused of being very worried and sad. In that case - such behavior was portrayed they were worried about getting caught.

    This is very violent way to kill somebody and to deal with the immediate consequences - huge amount of blood and the victim dying in her own blood.
    and like crusine says - neither of them has history of violence. There is large enough research of what pot does to your brain and thats what they say they were using. Cops didnt do any other testing and I think more serious drugs leave trace in the system for a longer period of time so this guessing they were two druggies who were having sex orgies is very biased & was "well played" buy the persecution. I read now that the prosecutor denise making statements of a satanic sex rituals. Interesting how I remember reading his quotes in the italian press when the case was opened. This was the time I was diligently reading everyday news in italian in hopes to improve my italian reading skills so I remember. It was just the start of the academic year so I was persistent :p

    I've never been in any similar situation but I was a witness of a person being coerced (or "lead to") by the police to support the theory they had in mind as the most plausible. This person had first hand knowledge of an event she couldnt have known was important for a completely different situation and was made to consider different scenarios and ended up saying she cannot be sure of her knowledge. Two hours after this - she broke down and realised she just ruined her credibility and possibly made other people suspects of not so legal things. This is as far as I can talk about it, but I cannot not remember it and keep it in mind.

    Things in life happen in many ways. The lack of real motive, supported by evidence or testimonies makes this case against Knox and even more so against Sollecito weak to build.
     
  30. agalisgv

    agalisgv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    24,018
    I thought finding Knox's blood on the murder weapon was a major point.
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2014